<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: One of the publishers who had published fake peer-reviewed papers generated by a computer program has responded aggressively to fix the problem.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/one-of-the-publishers-who-had-published-fake-peer-reviewed-papers-generated-by-a-computer-program-has-responded-aggressively-to-fix-the-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/one-of-the-publishers-who-had-published-fake-peer-reviewed-papers-generated-by-a-computer-program-has-responded-aggressively-to-fix-the-problem/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 20:48:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: PeterF		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/one-of-the-publishers-who-had-published-fake-peer-reviewed-papers-generated-by-a-computer-program-has-responded-aggressively-to-fix-the-problem/#comment-156988</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PeterF]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 20:48:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=27619#comment-156988</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Apparently in some instances &quot;peer review&quot; is as useful as &quot;consensus&quot;. Curious as to how many of these &quot;scientists&quot; that singled on to these nonsense works are also included the group that is cited as being in consensus that Global warming is human caused... I wonder if there are lists that can be compared.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently in some instances &#8220;peer review&#8221; is as useful as &#8220;consensus&#8221;. Curious as to how many of these &#8220;scientists&#8221; that singled on to these nonsense works are also included the group that is cited as being in consensus that Global warming is human caused&#8230; I wonder if there are lists that can be compared.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Cotour		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/one-of-the-publishers-who-had-published-fake-peer-reviewed-papers-generated-by-a-computer-program-has-responded-aggressively-to-fix-the-problem/#comment-156932</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cotour]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:33:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=27619#comment-156932</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Here are some interesting proposals, Genghis Khan was apparently an accidental green machine way back in the 1200&#039;s. He apparently killed so many people, about 12 percent of the entire worlds population at the time, that the results of his &quot;cleansing&quot; was to begin the first real effort in the green movement.

1. Is it possible that such a relatively small number of human beings at the level of technology of the day really detectable at all related to the climate on the planet?

2. Dosnt this kind of interpretation of &quot;global warming&quot; / &quot;climate change&quot; what ever the newest variant terminology of the day might be indicate the intent of the movement? Are we to preparing for the justification for &quot;cleansing&quot;? Is this where this all ends?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html

http://www.ecology.com/population-estimates-year-2050/]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here are some interesting proposals, Genghis Khan was apparently an accidental green machine way back in the 1200&#8217;s. He apparently killed so many people, about 12 percent of the entire worlds population at the time, that the results of his &#8220;cleansing&#8221; was to begin the first real effort in the green movement.</p>
<p>1. Is it possible that such a relatively small number of human beings at the level of technology of the day really detectable at all related to the climate on the planet?</p>
<p>2. Dosnt this kind of interpretation of &#8220;global warming&#8221; / &#8220;climate change&#8221; what ever the newest variant terminology of the day might be indicate the intent of the movement? Are we to preparing for the justification for &#8220;cleansing&#8221;? Is this where this all ends?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1350272/Genghis-Khan-killed-people-forests-grew-carbon-levels-dropped.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.ecology.com/population-estimates-year-2050/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.ecology.com/population-estimates-year-2050/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
